Re: Guilt, satiety, calorie restriction...

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 10/3/03 6:49:55 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

paultheo2000@... writes:

> Interesting; I guess I'm not convinced either way right now. I did get

> pretty chubby eating a lot of food in the past, but that food was

> mostly junk. We'll see what happens now.

Right. No comparison. " A calorie is a calorie " is pure bull* & %. Just ask

Christie ;-)

Chris

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 10/3/03 6:52:05 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

paultheo2000@... writes:

> the occasional carbonated aspartame beverage. I drink just enough not

> to have to go the bathroom on a consistent basis

Out of curiosity, why do you drink aspartame beverages if you have any

interest in health? Or are you not aware of the toxic effects of aspartame?

Aspartame is a conglomeration of potent neurotoxins, so you're better off

with sugar drinks (if you're going to choose between the two), since they taste

better anyway.

Chris

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 10/3/03 6:58:34 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

paultheo2000@... writes:

> Here's one: <A

HREF= " http://www.dolfzine.com/page129.htm " >http://www.dolfzine.com/page129.htm</\

A>

This says it all:

" Using this approach over the years, I have decreased my food intake

(including proteins) by at least one-third, but, unlike many CR (caloric

reduction)

devotees, I have not lost any bodymass, strength, muscle or zest

for life. "

I don't know if you misread or misunderstood what I wrote, or misunderstand

what this article is saying, but I didn't say anything about maintaining weight

or body mass. What I said was GROWTH is impossible without caloric excess.

I don't really see the point in disputing this: the process of growth

requires energy, in addition to what energy you would need for other purposes,

and in

order for muscles to grow, they must incorporate proteins into the cells,

which would otherwise be used for energy, and therefore represent caloric value

in the diet. What exactly about this are you questioning?

Furthermore, the article you linked to said nothing about a) How much Mel

Siff weighs b)how much Mel Siff eats c) whether Mel Siff has been able to

*gain*

muscle mass while CRing or d) how Mel Siff distinguishes between caloric

restriction, caloric equilibrium, and caloric excess.

> Now, this isn't the most scientific article out there, but I should

> point out that Mel Siff is probabaly THE foremost authority when it

> comes to weightlifting.

Are you serious? What exactly does it *mean* to be the " foremost authority "

about something, and on what basis are you claiming this? If Mel Siff is the

foremost authority on weight lifting, why does every weight lifting mag out

there give completely opposite advice?

This reminds me of when I was told that Bob Barefoot was " the world's leading

expert on calcium. " As an article posted on this list later showed, that's a

crock of crap, and the guy has a two-year degree in non-biological calcium.

It seems to me people throw these phrases around to put authority behind

something when the material/research can't stand on its own, and people seem to

take the claims at face value when they usually aren't justified.

Chris

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 10/3/03 7:01:19 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

paultheo2000@... writes:

> I cook my liver in coconut oil, a hefty amount. And I know what you're

> saying about eating more calories and not getting fat... but that

> wasn't entirely the cas for me. I got up around 160lbs and was

> somewhat chubby (though fairly muscular) which I didn't like. Then

> again, I was eating junk (mainly chocolate milk and PB sandwhiches on

> white bread) which could account for that.

>

The question becomes what to you is a hefty amount. And if your average meal

contains 500 calories (assuming you eat three a day) you either aren't eating

very much liver, or your amount isn't hefty enough. (A " hefty " amount of fat

for say, a third pound of liver, could easily reach 500 calories in itself,

and that's only the protein portion of the meal).

In my experience, coconut oil does not have the satiety value of longer-chain

saturated fats. If you have access to decent tallow you might want to use

that, or clarified butter. Otherwise, you might want to consider drinking a

glass of cream with your liver, or simply eating the liver first, and then

eating

ice cream until you're full, after you've consumed the protein and veggies

you need.

My ice cream is 1 quart heavy raw cream, 2 cups wild blueberries, 6 egg

yolks, and 3 tbsp raw honey. I really don't see how it could be considered

anything other than a health food, so it seems quality ice cream can be safely

pigged

out on. I'd also use all cream in it rather than CO and coconut milk if

you're having hunger problems, as, as I said before, I believe butter to have a

significantly higher satiety value than CO.

Chris

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 10/3/03 7:02:53 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

paultheo2000@... writes:

> I confess that in my ignorance I merely assumed that the key was to

> limit total insulin produced. I believe this is the line Mercola

> takes? Damnit then...fruits and healthy breads are back in until

> contrary evidence!

No, I think Mercola is using the logic that too much total insulin production

will cause insulin resistance. There is some truth to this, but it's more

complicated than that, as discussed in the recent thread about carbs, gluten,

and T2 diabetes.

I suggest reading Ori's article that someone posted the other day if you

haven't, for suggestions on how to maintain the benefits of carb foods without

leading to insulin resistance.

I'd also emphasize that I don't consider whole wheat bread to be healthy at

all. You might want to consider yourself guilty until proven innocent in terms

of wheat gluten as a precaution, and I really don't think non-sprouted or

non-extra-long-risen bread has much health value.

On the other hand, I think something like Manna rye bread, which should be

available in any health food store, is great, providing you don't have a

reaction to non-wheat gluten proteins.

But my main point includes things like berries. If you are having trouble

staying away from junk food, just eat your heart's content of ice cream made

with healthy sugar foods like wild blueberries as the main sweetener, with

complimentary sweetener of raw honey or stevia or whatever you like. The rest

is

cream and egg yolks, which are super-health foods, especially if it's raw

grass-fed cream.

Chris

[Guest guest]

On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 15:05:04 -0700

Heidi Schuppenhauer <heidis@...> wrote:

>If it is just a theory " I shouldn't eat this because I've

>read it is bad " then I think it is really hard to stick to.

>

>-- Heidi

>

Oh how true, how true how true!

It is one thing to know for example that sugar is bad for you. It is

another thing to read a book like Sugar Blues and read up close and

personal just how bad it really can be.

The one is kind of a general intellectual agreement. The later can make

that agreement a conviction which registers deep down in your bones, LOL!

Exciting Jealousy in Women and Terror in Men

Taki on marriage.

http://tinyurl.com/p7pr

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 10/3/03 4:58:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

paultheo2000@... writes:

> Well, I don't feed into the anti aspartame propaganda. I've yet to see

> a SINGLE validated study on this issue, anywhere. I'll I've seen is

> internet scare techniques.

> If you have a single valid study I would love to have a look.

> Everything I've read would lead me to believe that it's simply a

> nutritionally void beverage.

The FDA gets more complaints about aspartame than all other products

combined, and the when aspartame was released into the market the FDA's board

voted

against allowing it on the market, and the director vetoed them. I personally

think consuming wood alcohol and phenylalinine is a pretty bad idea... if you

want, there is a good article on PPNF's website. www.price-pottenger.org,

select " articles " and scroll down to the one on aspartame.

Chris

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 10/3/03 5:01:08 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

paultheo2000@... writes:

> Your tone is often very provocative. I'm just throwing the issue

> there; I'm not looking for debate.

Hmm... didn't mean to be provocative.

> You're right...I must have misread the article (read it a long time

> ago). My apologies there.

Ok.

> I will stand by my comment about Mel Siff having been the ultimate

> authority when it came to weightlifting---you'll note that if you ever

> read books in that field.

I'm not sure what you mean by the term... I perceive " ultimate " as being

different than " foremost, " particularly in the subjectivity of the former.

Chris

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 10/3/03 5:04:18 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

paultheo2000@... writes:

> Would you mind expanding on where you think Mercola goes wrong?

,

Mercola's stance, as I understand it (based on his website/newsletter,

haven't read his book) is that berries should be consumed in small quantities

for

their nutritional value, but should be avoided in large quantities because of

their sugar content, while grainst should be eliminated for people struggling

with health problems or obesity, and should be included in small amounts for

health people or people with trouble maintaining weight.

The approach seems more or less reasonable to me. But I also think that for

someone who is weight training, you need plenty of carbs to maintain glycogen

stores. I also think certain sugar-rich foods are loaded with beneficial

compounds, like berries, and should be consumed regularly. And I think some

people require starches for their metabolism.

Some ways to increase insulin insensitivity include eliminating carb-rich

foods-- but other ways, like the WD, limit carbs to cycles, thereby including

the

benefits of the foods, while not overconsuming them leading to insulin

sensitivity.

So I don't think Mercola really " goes wrong " per se-- but rather that there

are more optimal methods than excluding carby foods as a whole group, and I

think for folks like you and me we have to consider our needs as young male's

who

are physcially active.

Chris

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 10/3/03 7:23:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

paultheo2000@... writes:

> I had a quick look and I expected something more thorough from

> a scientific guy like yourself. Do you know of any REAL studies

> showing aspartame to be harmful? Until then, it all sounds like

> hogwash to me. If I were to apply that amount of caution I wouldn't be

> eating fish, carrots, fat, carbs or anything at all.

,

You might be right, it looks possibly overblown. I did a little looking, and

it looks like potential dangerous stuff-- aspartame DOES raise methanol and

fermaldehyde blood levels, but it might be true that exposure to these are even

greater from non-aspartame sources, in which case it might be insignificant.

Also I'd taken the claims of neurotoxicity of phenylalinine at face value

which I've read from a variety of sources, but it looks like this might

primarily

be a problem with people that have an inborn problem with metabolising

phenylalynine.

So what is probably the case is that in normal humans under normal

circumstances aspartame is not signficantly neurotoxic, but that if it is stored

at high

temperatures including those reached during summer heat waves it could be

very, very neurotoxic, and for people with problems metabolising phenylalinine

or

aspartic acid, it could be neurotoxic.

This might explain the discrepancy between the anecdotal evidence and the

experimental evidence.

In which case severe caution should still be exercised with using it, but

chances might be that it's safe rather than not safe.

Chris

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 10/3/03 7:26:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

paultheo2000@... writes:

> Alright, makes sense; thanks for elaborating. In any case, I think

> you'd have to get down right fanatic about health to watch consumption

> of something healthy like berries. I'm still not sure about breads

> (even sprouted); I guess the best thing is to let my palate decide

> over time

That's all I was saying-- that totally throwing out things that taste good

and are nutritious is self-tyrannizing and would decrease happiness for no good

reason. I'm pretty much a " health fanatic, " but I'll continue to eat berries.

My point is you should make deserts that taste really yummy, but find

creative ways to make them healthy, rather than practice super-sugar-asceticism.

Chris

[Guest guest]

Well, I don't feed into the anti aspartame propaganda. I've yet to see

a SINGLE validated study on this issue, anywhere. I'll I've seen is

internet scare techniques.

If you have a single valid study I would love to have a look.

Everything I've read would lead me to believe that it's simply a

nutritionally void beverage.

-

> In a message dated 10/3/03 6:52:05 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

> paultheo2000@y... writes:

>

> > the occasional carbonated aspartame beverage. I drink just enough not

> > to have to go the bathroom on a consistent basis

>

> Out of curiosity, why do you drink aspartame beverages if you have any

> interest in health? Or are you not aware of the toxic effects of

aspartame?

>

> Aspartame is a conglomeration of potent neurotoxins, so you're

better off

> with sugar drinks (if you're going to choose between the two), since

they taste

> better anyway.

>

> Chris

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Your tone is often very provocative. I'm just throwing the issue

there; I'm not looking for debate.

You're right...I must have misread the article (read it a long time

ago). My apologies there.

I will stand by my comment about Mel Siff having been the ultimate

authority when it came to weightlifting---you'll note that if you ever

read books in that field.

Cheers,

-

> In a message dated 10/3/03 6:58:34 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

> paultheo2000@y... writes:

>

> > Here's one: <A

HREF= " http://www.dolfzine.com/page129.htm " >http://www.dolfzine.com/page129.htm</\

A>

>

> This says it all:

>

> " Using this approach over the years, I have decreased my food intake

> (including proteins) by at least one-third, but, unlike many CR

(caloric reduction)

> devotees, I have not lost any bodymass, strength, muscle or zest

> for life. "

>

> I don't know if you misread or misunderstood what I wrote, or

misunderstand

> what this article is saying, but I didn't say anything about

maintaining weight

> or body mass. What I said was GROWTH is impossible without caloric

excess.

>

> I don't really see the point in disputing this: the process of growth

> requires energy, in addition to what energy you would need for other

purposes, and in

> order for muscles to grow, they must incorporate proteins into the

cells,

> which would otherwise be used for energy, and therefore represent

caloric value

> in the diet. What exactly about this are you questioning?

>

> Furthermore, the article you linked to said nothing about a) How

much Mel

> Siff weighs b)how much Mel Siff eats c) whether Mel Siff has been

able to *gain*

> muscle mass while CRing or d) how Mel Siff distinguishes between

caloric

> restriction, caloric equilibrium, and caloric excess.

>

> > Now, this isn't the most scientific article out there, but I should

> > point out that Mel Siff is probabaly THE foremost authority when it

> > comes to weightlifting.

>

> Are you serious? What exactly does it *mean* to be the " foremost

authority "

> about something, and on what basis are you claiming this? If Mel

Siff is the

> foremost authority on weight lifting, why does every weight lifting

mag out

> there give completely opposite advice?

>

> This reminds me of when I was told that Bob Barefoot was " the

world's leading

> expert on calcium. " As an article posted on this list later showed,

that's a

> crock of crap, and the guy has a two-year degree in non-biological

calcium.

>

> It seems to me people throw these phrases around to put authority

behind

> something when the material/research can't stand on its own, and

people seem to

> take the claims at face value when they usually aren't justified.

>

> Chris

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Thanks for the input. The probable reason why you thought my hunger

was so incredible is simply because you're eating twice as much as I

am...making it a lot easier to be satiated.

-

> In a message dated 10/3/03 7:01:19 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

> paultheo2000@y... writes:

>

> > I cook my liver in coconut oil, a hefty amount. And I know what you're

> > saying about eating more calories and not getting fat... but that

> > wasn't entirely the cas for me. I got up around 160lbs and was

> > somewhat chubby (though fairly muscular) which I didn't like. Then

> > again, I was eating junk (mainly chocolate milk and PB sandwhiches on

> > white bread) which could account for that.

> >

>

> The question becomes what to you is a hefty amount. And if your

average meal

> contains 500 calories (assuming you eat three a day) you either

aren't eating

> very much liver, or your amount isn't hefty enough. (A " hefty "

amount of fat

> for say, a third pound of liver, could easily reach 500 calories in

itself,

> and that's only the protein portion of the meal).

>

> In my experience, coconut oil does not have the satiety value of

longer-chain

> saturated fats. If you have access to decent tallow you might want

to use

> that, or clarified butter. Otherwise, you might want to consider

drinking a

> glass of cream with your liver, or simply eating the liver first,

and then eating

> ice cream until you're full, after you've consumed the protein and

veggies

> you need.

>

> My ice cream is 1 quart heavy raw cream, 2 cups wild blueberries, 6 egg

> yolks, and 3 tbsp raw honey. I really don't see how it could be

considered

> anything other than a health food, so it seems quality ice cream can

be safely pigged

> out on. I'd also use all cream in it rather than CO and coconut

milk if

> you're having hunger problems, as, as I said before, I believe

butter to have a

> significantly higher satiety value than CO.

>

> Chris

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Sounds like a plan; that's what I've started doing

Would you mind expanding on where you think Mercola goes wrong?

-

> In a message dated 10/3/03 7:02:53 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

> paultheo2000@y... writes:

>

> > I confess that in my ignorance I merely assumed that the key was to

> > limit total insulin produced. I believe this is the line Mercola

> > takes? Damnit then...fruits and healthy breads are back in until

> > contrary evidence!

>

> No, I think Mercola is using the logic that too much total insulin

production

> will cause insulin resistance. There is some truth to this, but

it's more

> complicated than that, as discussed in the recent thread about

carbs, gluten,

> and T2 diabetes.

>

> I suggest reading Ori's article that someone posted the other day if

you

> haven't, for suggestions on how to maintain the benefits of carb

foods without

> leading to insulin resistance.

>

> I'd also emphasize that I don't consider whole wheat bread to be

healthy at

> all. You might want to consider yourself guilty until proven

innocent in terms

> of wheat gluten as a precaution, and I really don't think

non-sprouted or

> non-extra-long-risen bread has much health value.

>

> On the other hand, I think something like Manna rye bread, which

should be

> available in any health food store, is great, providing you don't

have a

> reaction to non-wheat gluten proteins.

>

> But my main point includes things like berries. If you are having

trouble

> staying away from junk food, just eat your heart's content of ice

cream made

> with healthy sugar foods like wild blueberries as the main

sweetener, with

> complimentary sweetener of raw honey or stevia or whatever you like.

The rest is

> cream and egg yolks, which are super-health foods, especially if

it's raw

> grass-fed cream.

>

> Chris

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I had a quick look and I expected something more thorough from

a scientific guy like yourself. Do you know of any REAL studies

showing aspartame to be harmful? Until then, it all sounds like

hogwash to me. If I were to apply that amount of caution I wouldn't be

eating fish, carrots, fat, carbs or anything at all.

-

> In a message dated 10/3/03 4:58:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

> paultheo2000@y... writes:

>

> > Well, I don't feed into the anti aspartame propaganda. I've yet to see

> > a SINGLE validated study on this issue, anywhere. I'll I've seen is

> > internet scare techniques.

> > If you have a single valid study I would love to have a look.

> > Everything I've read would lead me to believe that it's simply a

> > nutritionally void beverage.

>

> The FDA gets more complaints about aspartame than all other products

> combined, and the when aspartame was released into the market the

FDA's board voted

> against allowing it on the market, and the director vetoed them. I

personally

> think consuming wood alcohol and phenylalinine is a pretty bad

idea... if you

> want, there is a good article on PPNF's website.

www.price-pottenger.org,

> select " articles " and scroll down to the one on aspartame.

>

> Chris

[Guest guest]

Alright, makes sense; thanks for elaborating. In any case, I think

you'd have to get down right fanatic about health to watch consumption

of something healthy like berries. I'm still not sure about breads

(even sprouted); I guess the best thing is to let my palate decide

over time

Cheers,

-

> In a message dated 10/3/03 5:04:18 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

> paultheo2000@y... writes:

>

> > Would you mind expanding on where you think Mercola goes wrong?

>

> ,

>

> Mercola's stance, as I understand it (based on his website/newsletter,

> haven't read his book) is that berries should be consumed in small

quantities for

> their nutritional value, but should be avoided in large quantities

because of

> their sugar content, while grainst should be eliminated for people

struggling

> with health problems or obesity, and should be included in small

amounts for

> health people or people with trouble maintaining weight.

>

> The approach seems more or less reasonable to me. But I also think

that for

> someone who is weight training, you need plenty of carbs to maintain

glycogen

> stores. I also think certain sugar-rich foods are loaded with

beneficial

> compounds, like berries, and should be consumed regularly. And I

think some

> people require starches for their metabolism.

>

> Some ways to increase insulin insensitivity include eliminating

carb-rich

> foods-- but other ways, like the WD, limit carbs to cycles, thereby

including the

> benefits of the foods, while not overconsuming them leading to insulin

> sensitivity.

>

> So I don't think Mercola really " goes wrong " per se-- but rather

that there

> are more optimal methods than excluding carby foods as a whole

group, and I

> think for folks like you and me we have to consider our needs as

young male's who

> are physcially active.

>

> Chris

[Guest guest]

Yeah, that's pretty much the way I saw it as well. Anyway, I plan to

drop the no-sugar carbonated beverages from my diet anyway due to the

insulinogenic effect (pavlovian response, I believe) and because the

acclimation to sweetness probably detracts from the tastes of other

foods.

-

> In a message dated 10/3/03 7:23:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

> paultheo2000@y... writes:

>

> > I had a quick look and I expected something more thorough from

> > a scientific guy like yourself. Do you know of any REAL studies

> > showing aspartame to be harmful? Until then, it all sounds like

> > hogwash to me. If I were to apply that amount of caution I

wouldn't be

> > eating fish, carrots, fat, carbs or anything at all.

>

> ,

>

> You might be right, it looks possibly overblown. I did a little

looking, and

> it looks like potential dangerous stuff-- aspartame DOES raise

methanol and

> fermaldehyde blood levels, but it might be true that exposure to

these are even

> greater from non-aspartame sources, in which case it might be

insignificant.

>

> Also I'd taken the claims of neurotoxicity of phenylalinine at face

value

> which I've read from a variety of sources, but it looks like this

might primarily

> be a problem with people that have an inborn problem with metabolising

> phenylalynine.

>

> So what is probably the case is that in normal humans under normal

> circumstances aspartame is not signficantly neurotoxic, but that if

it is stored at high

> temperatures including those reached during summer heat waves it

could be

> very, very neurotoxic, and for people with problems metabolising

phenylalinine or

> aspartic acid, it could be neurotoxic.

>

> This might explain the discrepancy between the anecdotal evidence

and the

> experimental evidence.

>

> In which case severe caution should still be exercised with using

it, but

> chances might be that it's safe rather than not safe.

>

> Chris

[Guest guest]

-

Not really, at least if you're low-carbing.

>In any case, I think

>you'd have to get down right fanatic about health to watch consumption

>of something healthy like berries.

-

[Guest guest]

Sounds like we agree. If the taste is similar though, I still can't

get myself to use vanilla sugar instead of vanilla extract (or

extracts in general). Coconut and chocolate icecream can be

deliciously sweetened with stevia though, I find. Maybe a carb-free

maple syrup would make for good icecream (with cream, coconut milk,

egg yolks which is what I usually use).

-

> In a message dated 10/3/03 7:26:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

> paultheo2000@y... writes:

>

> > Alright, makes sense; thanks for elaborating. In any case, I think

> > you'd have to get down right fanatic about health to watch

consumption

> > of something healthy like berries. I'm still not sure about breads

> > (even sprouted); I guess the best thing is to let my palate decide

> > over time

>

> That's all I was saying-- that totally throwing out things that

taste good

> and are nutritious is self-tyrannizing and would decrease happiness

for no good

> reason. I'm pretty much a " health fanatic, " but I'll continue to

eat berries.

>

> My point is you should make deserts that taste really yummy, but find

> creative ways to make them healthy, rather than practice

super-sugar-asceticism.

>

> Chris

[Guest guest]

I think if it weren't for fruits I might be a low-carber myself...but

I just can't do away with them, especially if I know some of them have

very potent health properties.

-(theo)

> -

>

> Not really, at least if you're low-carbing.

>

> >In any case, I think

> >you'd have to get down right fanatic about health to watch consumption

> >of something healthy like berries.

>

>

>

> -

[Guest guest]

-

I recommend _Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills_ by L. Blaylock.

>Do you know of any REAL studies

>showing aspartame to be harmful?

-

[Guest guest]

I have many books on my to-read list...how do I know this won't be a

scare-tactic book? Afterall, there are dozens of these 'Aspartame

Disease' books and websites out there.

Last person online I spoke too told me that the last 500 studies on

aspartame have shown it to be safe.

-

> -

>

> I recommend _Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills_ by L. Blaylock.

>

> >Do you know of any REAL studies

> >showing aspartame to be harmful?

>

>

>

> -

[Guest guest]

>> I think if it weren't for fruits I might be a low-carber myself...but

I just can't do away with them, especially if I know some of them have

very potent health properties. <<

Atkins as a weight loss plan includes berries and melon even in the beginning

(after the first 14 days), and other fruits are brought back in later. But if

you are not trying to lose fat, then " Atkins for Life " includes fruit all along.

There may be a few extremely high glycemic fruits that are excluded, I'm not

sure, but as far as I know, all the most nutrient-dense fruits are fine.

I can't speak about other low carb plans and fruit - most of the really popular

ones such as Carb Addicts and Somersize are actually LESS restrictive than

Atkins about carbs, but I believe that a few low carb plans do limit or possibly

exclude all fruits - like, maybe Neanderthin? I'm not sure.

I eat all kinds of berries on Atkins. I would eat melon but I just haven't

wanted any.

Christie

[Guest guest]

-

My personal recommendation. Either you believe me or you don't. In the

unlikely event I have time, I could dig up my copy and post some excerpts

for you, but I doubt I'll be able to.

>I have many books on my to-read list...how do I know this won't be a

>scare-tactic book?

-